TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT directs deletion of disallowance on sundry creditors & remands interest issue for reevaluation</h1> <h3>Mukeshkumar Ratilal Modi Versus Income Tax Officer, Patan Ward-3, Mehsana</h3> Mukeshkumar Ratilal Modi Versus Income Tax Officer, Patan Ward-3, Mehsana - TMI Issues:1. Disallowance of &8377; 3,22,037/- on account of sundry creditors.2. Disallowance of &8377; 83,673/- on account of interest.Analysis:Issue 1: Disallowance of &8377; 3,22,037/- on account of sundry creditors:The Assessing Officer disallowed the amount of &8377; 3,22,037/- on account of sundry creditors, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The appellant argued that the amount was an old credit balance of a cargo agent, M/s. United Liner Agency India (P) Ltd, and there were no new transactions in the relevant year. The appellant provided detailed explanations and submitted evidence to support their claim. The ITAT held that the CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition without sufficient evidence from the appellant. Therefore, the ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance.Issue 2: Disallowance of &8377; 83,673/- on account of interest:The Assessing Officer disallowed the entire interest expense of &8377; 83,673/- debited to the Profit & Loss Account, citing lack of disclosure of interest income and no evidence of charging or receiving interest on a specific loan. The appellant contended that the interest expenses were genuine, incurred during business, and supported by TDS deductions. The appellant also argued that the Assessing Officer did not consider the full context of the transactions and failed to establish a connection between interest-free creditors-liability and the alleged advance. The ITAT found merit in the appellant's submissions and remanded the issue back to the CIT(A) for reevaluation based on the provided details. The ITAT refrained from commenting on the case's merits due to the remand.In conclusion, the ITAT partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for a thorough reevaluation of both issues by the CIT(A) based on the detailed submissions and evidence presented by the appellant.
TaxTMI 